Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41652322›Full record

Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2026

Rhomboid intercostal block versus erector spinae plane block for perioperative analgesia in patients undergoing reduction mammoplasty: a prospective randomized study.

Shereen E Abd Ellatif, Rehab A Wahdan, Rasha A Wahdan, Emad Salah Ibrahim, Asmaa M Galal Eldin

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06225895 (Bilateral Rhomboid Intercostal Block Versus Erector Spinae Plane Block for Perioperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Bilateral Reduction Mammoplasty), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06225895 nacompletednot on this map

Bilateral Rhomboid Intercostal Block Versus Erector Spinae Plane Block for Perioperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Bilateral Reduction Mammoplasty

TypeinterventionalSponsorZagazig UniversityRan2024 to 2024Enrolled72ConditionsAnalgesiaArmsgeneral anesthesia, Erector spinae plane block, a rhomboid intercostal nerve block, Bupivacaine
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Shereen E Abd EllatifDepartment of Anesthesia, Intensive Care, and Pain Management, Faculty of Medicine, Zagazig University, Al- qwmiah, Zagazig, Egypt. sherinelsayed@zu.edu.eg.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7975-2480
Rehab A WahdanDepartment of Anesthesia, Intensive Care, and Pain Management, Faculty of Medicine, Zagazig University, Al- qwmiah, Zagazig, Egypt.
Rasha A WahdanDepartment of Anesthesia, Intensive Care, and Pain Management, Faculty of Medicine, Zagazig University, Al- qwmiah, Zagazig, Egypt.
Emad Salah IbrahimDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt.
Asmaa M Galal EldinDepartment of Anesthesia, Intensive Care, and Pain Management, Faculty of Medicine, Zagazig University, Al- qwmiah, Zagazig, Egypt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundErector spinae plane block (ESP) is inevitably effective in posterior thoracic surgeries, but its efficacy and safety in anterior thoracic surgeries—particularly bilateral surgeries—remain in dispute. This study aimed to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of rhomboid intercostal block (RIB) and ESP after reduction mammoplasty.

methodsThis prospective randomized controlled study was conducted on 72 patients scheduled for reduction mammoplasty. Patients were randomly assigned to three groups. Group C received general anesthesia, and groups ESP and RIB received ESP and RIB blocks, and general anesthesia. The primary outcome was the first rescue analgesic time. Postoperative pain score, 24 h nalbuphine consumption, and dermatomal level were the secondary outcomes.

resultsCompared with those in the ESP and control groups, the first rescue analgesic time and 24 h nalbuphine consumption were significantly longer and lower, respectively, in the RIB group. Furthermore, the RIB group had the lowest significant pain scores within the first 6 h postoperatively. Significant sensory blocking of the anterior hemithorax from T2-T9 was accomplished by the RIB, while more dermatomal blockade of the posterior hemithorax from T2-T9 was provided by the ESP.

conclusionsRIB is more effective than ESP in managing pain after reduction mammoplasty. It prolongs the duration of analgesia, reduces postoperative nalbuphine consumption and is associated with a lower incidence of complications; hence, RIB can be utilized as a promising alternative in anterior thoracic wall surgeries such as reduction mammoplasty.

trial registrationThis clinical trial was approved by Zagazig University’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) (ZU-IRB# 11408/January15, 2024) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06225895, registration date January 26, 2024), with the first research participant enrolled on February 1, 2024.

Indexed as

MammaplastyNerve BlockPostoperative PainAdultFemaleHumansIntercostal NervesMiddle AgedNalbuphineParaspinal MusclesProspective StudiesNalbuphineAnalgesiaErector spinae plane blockFascial plane blocksPlastic surgeryReduction mammoplastyRegional anesthesiaRhomboid intercostal block

Identifiers

PMID41652322
PMCPMC12930545

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.